The effects of high-stakes testing on student motivation and learning.
By: Amrein, A.L. & Berliner, D.C. (2003).
The article deals with high-stake tests and how they affect students' motivation and learning.
"No Child Left Behind Act" (2001) was passed into a law, assuming high-stakes tests would improve students' motivation and raise their achievement.
Evidence from 18 states in the USA that use high-stake tests shows that those tests decrease students' motivation , increase the percentage of students' retention and dropout from school. Research has shown that students become less intristically motivated to learn and less likely to engage in critical thinking when rewards and sanctions are attached to their performance on tests. When the stakes of the tests get high, teachers take control of the learning process, not letting students direct their own learning, or explore subjects of their interest. Students described their feelings as: anxious, angry, pessimistic and hostile towards those tests. They think test-driven lessons promote fear, boredom, mechanical teaching and learning, in which the joy of learning is prevented.
One alternative to rigorous graduation tests is the GED credential. 63% of the states with high-stakes graduation tests reported decreases in the average age of students who dropped out from school and took the GED test. When promotion to a higher grade depends on high-stakes tests, students who are retained because pf low scores are more likely to drop out before graduating. Retention does not motivate students to learn better, but to leave school early.
In terms of grades, high-stakes tests often bring about high scores because of several reasons: the curriculum is narrowed because schools need hours to prepare students for those tests; students learn only materials that appear on the test; some students (and even teachers) cheat on the test; "too many" students are kept from taking the tests- "identified" as 'special education' or 'a language minority'. Consequently, scores go up, but students have not learnt more, but less.
It has been found that high-stakes testing policies hurt students' learning. In general, they do not improve students' achievements. Apart from reading ( in which 69% of the states with high-stakes tests had better achievements than the rest of the nation ) there is no evidence that those tests increase students' learning. Test-scores are definitely affected by the fact that so many weak students are excluded from the tests...
In conclusion, high stakes testing policies did not result in measurable improvement in student learning. It reduces student motivation to learn, drives more students (and teachers) out of school, lessens student knowledge and education. Even if test-scores (artificially) rise the public education system will be hurt. Assessing, for its own sake, does not help students. They need help with the learning and learning conditions: high-quality preschools, small classes in early grades, well-qualified teachers. therefore, high-stakes testing should be stopped infavor of formative testing, accompanied by fiscal, intellectual and social reforms.
To sum up the topic, I conclude that high-stakes testing has many negative effects, on both students and teachers, and the learning itself. Everyone loses. The article informs us that such tests have terrible consequences among students (lessened motivation and knowledge, more retention and dropout from school, damage learning, anxiety and anger) and teachers (pressure and anxiety, teach less - only for the test, cheat, change profession). Everybody is put under pressure, and usually working under pressure and anxiety does not yield the best performances. Additionally, learning cannot be enjoyable and stimulating when there is the threat of the test over one's head.
Some optional changes I would like to suggestin high-stakes testing: more time to study for high-stakes tests; enabling another chance in case of failure ('Moed Bet')
The effects of high-stakes testing on student motivation and learning.
By: Amrein, A.L. & Berliner, D.C. (2003).
The article deals with high-stake tests and how they affect students' motivation and learning.
"No Child Left Behind Act" (2001) was passed into a law, assuming high-stakes tests would improve students' motivation and raise their achievement.
Evidence from 18 states in the USA that use high-stake tests shows that those tests decrease students' motivation , increase the percentage of students' retention and dropout from school. Research has shown that students become less intristically motivated to learn and less likely to engage in critical thinking when rewards and sanctions are attached to their performance on tests. When the stakes of the tests get high, teachers take control of the learning process, not letting students direct their own learning, or explore subjects of their interest. Students described their feelings as: anxious, angry, pessimistic and hostile towards those tests. They think test-driven lessons promote fear, boredom, mechanical teaching and learning, in which the joy of learning is prevented.
One alternative to rigorous graduation tests is the GED credential. 63% of the states with high-stakes graduation tests reported decreases in the average age of students who dropped out from school and took the GED test. When promotion to a higher grade depends on high-stakes tests, students who are retained because pf low scores are more likely to drop out before graduating. Retention does not motivate students to learn better, but to leave school early.
In terms of grades, high-stakes tests often bring about high scores because of several reasons: the curriculum is narrowed because schools need hours to prepare students for those tests; students learn only materials that appear on the test; some students (and even teachers) cheat on the test; "too many" students are kept from taking the tests- "identified" as 'special education' or 'a language minority'. Consequently, scores go up, but students have not learnt more, but less.
It has been found that high-stakes testing policies hurt students' learning. In general, they do not improve students' achievements. Apart from reading ( in which 69% of the states with high-stakes tests had better achievements than the rest of the nation ) there is no evidence that those tests increase students' learning. Test-scores are definitely affected by the fact that so many weak students are excluded from the tests...
In conclusion, high stakes testing policies did not result in measurable improvement in student learning. It reduces student motivation to learn, drives more students (and teachers) out of school, lessens student knowledge and education. Even if test-scores (artificially) rise the public education system will be hurt. Assessing, for its own sake, does not help students. They need help with the learning and learning conditions: high-quality preschools, small classes in early grades, well-qualified teachers. therefore, high-stakes testing should be stopped infavor of formative testing, accompanied by fiscal, intellectual and social reforms.
To sum up the topic, I conclude that high-stakes testing has many negative effects, on both students and teachers, and the learning itself. Everyone loses. The article informs us that such tests have terrible consequences among students (lessened motivation and knowledge, more retention and dropout from school, damage learning, anxiety and anger) and teachers (pressure and anxiety, teach less - only for the test, cheat, change profession). Everybody is put under pressure, and usually working under pressure and anxiety does not yield the best performances. Additionally, learning cannot be enjoyable and stimulating when there is the threat of the test over one's head.
Some optional changes I would like to suggestin high-stakes testing: more time to study for high-stakes tests; enabling another chance in case of failure ('Moed Bet')